Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
JDR
Judicial Dispute Resolution
as an Innovative Mode of
Dispute Resolution
1.
JDR
What is Judicial Dispute Resolution?
3
Goals
▸ Value Creation
▸ Problem Solving
▸ Option Generation
▸ Improvement of relationship
between parties
2.
JDR
The Process of JDR
6
Stage 1 Stage 2
Filing of complaint Pretrial
CAM Trial
JDR Judgment
7
Process
CAM JDR
All civil and criminal actions If the case is not settled
Trial
falling under the category of through CAM, they are
mediatable cases are first referred back to the judge to If it is still unsuccessful,
referred to a court whom the case was the case will be re-raffled
appointed mediator who is originally been assigned for to a different judge for
given 30 days to facilitate a a second attempt of trial
settlement mediation and that is JDR
8
Rules
Exception:
If specifically asked by the
parties to continue as trial judge
9
Rules
Mediation
Conciliation
Neutral evaluation
Or a combination of any of these
techniques
10
3.
JDR
History
11
History
• Pampanga,
• Bacolod,
• Baguio/Benguet,
• Cagayan De Oro,
• San Fernando La Union
12
History
4.
JDR
The Research Project
14
Research Questions
Indicators Used
Efficiency
Effectiveness
Satisfaction of stakeholders
Program organization
Service delivery
Program quality
16
5.
JDR
The Findings
17
Case Disposition
Satisfaction of stakeholders
Lawyers
disputes
Litigants
Role of Judges
Fairness of the Process
Outcomes
Improved Relationships
Time and Cost efficiency
19
Results
Usefulness in
Perceived as useful in 1st level courts
resolving court
disputes
but not so much in 2nd level courts
20
Results
Results
Results
Judges Lawyers Litigants
85%
Results
Improved
Relationships
25
Results
Program Organization
Qualities of Lawyers
Comments
Many judges are not
convinced that lawyers are able to
reach out to the other party in a
manner that encouraged the latter to
reciprocate and be reasonable.
28
6.
JDR
Program Observations and Recommendations
29
1. JDR generated positive 2. The trainings will require 3. Reversal of the order of CAM
outcomes in so far as first level considerable financial and JDR
courts are concerned. However, investment
the impact of JDR before the 2nd
level courts is still unclear. Reasons
To avoid the filing of CAM
Problems
Reasons
Limited amount of judicial Weaknesses of CAM
Parties have much greater
resources
incentive to settle early
Recommendations The CAM program has been losing its good
Recommendations mediators by reason of low compensation;
Creation of Specialized JDR CAM mediators lack the authority and moral
Futher training of judges courts ascendancy of a judge which is helpful in
especially 2nd level court judges
facilitating settlement;
Reasons Reasons
Reasons Stakeholder preference for a Many lawyers are not fully aware
The coverage will likely increase judge who actively guides the of the role they ought to play
JDR case disposals parties towards settlement during JDR
Recommendations Recommendations
Judges can combine facilitative Introduction to ADR concepts
and evaluative techniques. should be done as early as law
(i) Facilitative mediation that incorporates the school
use evaluative and fact-finding techniques such
as evaluation and mini-trial;
(ii) storytelling as a condition precedent to
option generation; and
(iii) issues pertaining to power imbalance
identification and correction.
31
Conclusion